pparaska

Bill, with the ignition timing retarded to 15 deg AFTER TDC, there's no wonder the exhaust headers were hot and the thing was puking coolant out of the overflow - retarded timing will cause lots of heat. Did it get a chance to run long enough after changing it to 12 BTDC to cool it down? Good Luck! Pete

I'd like to throw Canfield into the mix of heads that ought to be on the list. Just make sure that you buy heads that are machined by Canfield. (See the threads below for details.) I don't have any dyno or 1/4 mile times, but seat of the pants from having my 406 in the car with the Canfields and a good size solid roller with no real tuning told me that the heads are working very well. See the posts below for some info: http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=80497 http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=80680 http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=81935 http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=85464 http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=85482 http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=85663 (Note, my engine build up is discussed, but changed - I went with a solid roller and stud girdle.)

Conductive heat transfer (through metals, other solids) is inversely proportional to the tube wall thickness also: http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/conductive-heat-transfer-d_428.html So before you can really make a comparison, that equation alone needs to be fully filled out for each radiator tube. Then you have to consider the area the tube wall presents to the coolant and the air, in the directions those fluids are flowing over the wall to understand the convection heat transfer to and from the sides of the tube wall. Note that radiators are made from brass, not copper and brass, and brass actually has a lower conductive coefficient of heat transfer than aluminum: http://www.copper.org/applications/automotive/radiators/no_flux.html

"They fuel and air being ingested into the engine do not look at the brand on the valve cover when combining and igniting to make torque and power." To think that one brand has a corner on making that much better of an engine than the next one is disingenuous. Brand loyalty makes about as much sense to me as dating only blonds!

Steve, that's a great post! Would you mind if we used it in the FAQ section?

Ask Scottie-GNZ about what the correct sizing of a turbo will do for you - it won't lag and it will make torque down low. It's all in the selection. Of course, starting with 3.8 Liter engine (Buick Grand National) makes it a bit easier than starting with 2.0 liters. But just the same, if it felt dead down low, there is either a non-optimal turbo (for low rpm grunt) or tuning issues to point to. The LS1 vs turbo 4 cyl thing comes down to preference, nothing else. There are so many variables. Simplicity, ease of tuning, tolerance for below-par octane fuel, etc. are some of my reasons for preferring natural aspiration or low pressure turbo/supercharging with lots of swept volume (displacement). But there are plenty of stinking fast cars out there with 4 cylinders and turbos that can do the trick too.

No flames here. But you should read the JTR manual to get an idea of what's involved, and it talks about transmission choices. Check out the drivetrain forum too. Start here - there are links to a few kits and the JTR page with their manual and parts. Automatic trans w/o overdrive will be cheapest and easiest. A decent TH350 will be fine for this, but not as much fun, IMO. I've used a Tremec 5spd and a G-Force T-5. The first had a very low 1st gear, was a bit notchy shifting with a short shifter, the G-Force T-5 will run you out of the car when it's in 3rd gear due to the low helix angle on the gears . Man, that thing is noisy! Good luck and welcome to HybridZ!

I know that I've been caught by this before. Thanks for posting this, as maybe I'll remember next time .

Darius is a young guy - he'll just have to hit the gym more often to get some huge arms and chest muscles to make up for the absence of PS! LoL! Darius - Awesome looking and sounding! I can't wait to see some vids of you punishing that thing under full throttle!

Read the FAQs, get the JTR manual, then read and search. http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?p=565472

I guess this might be hard to find the answer to, but there's no sense even trying to use that tranny as it will most likely break, even with a relatively weak SB like the 305. The cost of the adapter could be used to get a T-5 from an Camaro/Firebird that would bolt up easily and bolt in with ease.

FWIW, in that application (327, 9.5:1 compression, ported 461 GM heads) that cam worked out to be just streetable. Driveability in traffic was not great, the power was good though, as I was able to run a 12.78@110.4mph with a bunch of tire spin and 1.95 second 60' times. It needed to be just a bit less radical to be truly streetable. I always wondered what 10:1 or more compression would have done in that arrangement as I never had detonation problems on pump gas. It may have brought the dynamic compression ratio up a bit to make it more streetable. I have moved on, now with a 406 and Canfield heads that flow a lot better. Went from a mildish solid roller to one that was too big. I need to split the difference on the next cam. More info on that in this thread: http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=102280

BJ - I didn't mean to say that the stock water pump totally fixed things. It was a strange intermittent problem I was having and the water pump change didn't really seem to fix it. I really believe that the problem I had with the 327 and the problem I have now is related to air in the system, as I've tried a 3rd water pump on the 406 now, an Edelbrock Vic Jr pump, and it acts the same as the Steward Stage 2 pump and the OE pump I've tried. Glenn McCoy has a BMW 3 series radiator in his Z, with a Volvo closed system remote coolant tank and cap on the system, and it seems to not have the problems with air in the system. I don't think fixing this problem is a huge hassle as I think getting either an air bleed or a radiator cap with overflow outlet at the highest point is the way to fix it.

IMO, There's a serious mismatch of components if an engine with 10:1 compression and that much lift on the cam can't make 1.1 to 1.2 hp/ci. I'd guess that with good heads you should be at 400hp easily if it truly is a 400, but if it's a 377, you ought to get 400+hp if the build has good heads and the cam and intake are matched to the head flow and its TUNED WELL!

Larry, how much for those as pictured?

Well, I went with a Dart block due to asking around and hearing stories like that. I went with the Canfield heads due to what I'd heard from some engine builders and the flow numbers on the 215s they quoted. As my post above states, the intake flow was as good or better than they quoted, the exhaust wasn't but required only some minor cleanup to get to flow well like they advertised. I priced AFRs and it appeared they were into nickel and diming you to death to get things that were already on the Canfields. $1100 and some change for complete heads that flow great seemed like a deal.

I'm guessing 650hp would be really easy with a mild pump gas setup with that engine/trans. I don't like a lot of boost or N2O - they are just too "on-the-edge" for me. I prefer killing them with cubes mostly, and a bit of efficient positive displacement (or axial flow) supercharging if the pocketbook is deep enough. You don't "NEED" 427 cubes, but then again, you don't need more than the little stock L28 puts out either . And she doesn't need super-firm 38 double D's either! (but thank God she wants them and will pay you for them!!! )

LSX with 427 cubes, and a Magnuson supercharger with the High Helix design? That way you don't have to wait for the boost, just buy really sticky tires since the torque is EVERYWHERE. :burnout:

I'd love to see a back to back set of dyno runs (engine or chassis) with 1-5/8" block huggers and 3" exhaust, 1-3/4" shorties (love to know what will fit!!!), 1-7/8" shorties (again, what fits and with what mods?), and 1-3/4" long tubes (I imagine the 32 Ford streetrod header for the SBC?). Carb and or EFI tuning should be done to make the F/A ratios the same for each setup. Anyone got the bucks to look into this?

rjdtonto: Please go back and edit that post. I can't tell if you are saying to have buy bare or not, whose fault it was that the heads you received were screwed up, etc. etc.

I have had too-hot (indicated by the temp gage) cooling system problems for a long time on several V8s, two different radiators and water pumps. I'm convinced that half the problem is the temp sensor (in the intake manifold, at a height near the top of the radiator) getting uncovered and reading the temperature of the steam. The gage can swing quickly as the attitude of the car changes, etc. At other times the system would boil over, so it really was getting hot. But it always seemed to have a lot of air in the system when I would check the level. I tried jacking it way up, revving the engine and adding water, but that is a real pain - I want a better method, and this thread points to two - BuZy's and JTRs. I'm betting it's an air pocket in my case as well as the above cases. BuZy's idea for a radiator cap at the engine is interesting but I don't have room for that with my strut bar going right over the thermostat housing. I'm wondering if an Air Bleed in the radiator hose at it's highest point (just before the thermostat housing) or in the housing itself is a good thing to try. MikeJTR- What does this air bleed you sell look like? Is it something with external threads that I could drill and tap some kind of pipe threaded hole in my AL thermostat housing and use the bleed there.

Check out BH1080, bottom of page: http://www.rewarderheaders.com/search_result.asp?CATEGORY=Block+Huggers&MANUFACTURER=ALL&DESCRIPTION=&PRODUCT_ID= Or top of this page, BH1090: http://www.rewarderheaders.com/search_result.asp?DESCRIPTION=&MANUFACTURER=ALL&PRODUCT_ID=&CATEGORY=Block+Huggers&SQLStmt=SELECT+*+FROM+PRODUCT+WHERE+%28%28DESCRIPTION+LIKE+%27%25%25%27+OR+LONG_DESCRIPTION+LIKE+%27%25%25%27%29+AND+%28PRODUCT_ID+LIKE+%27%25%25%27%29+AND+%28%28product.CATEGORY+%3D+%27Block+Huggers%27%29+AND+%28%28product.MFG+LIKE+%27%25%25%27%29+OR+%28product.MFG+%3D+%27%27%29%29%29%29+ORDER+BY+PRODUCT_ID+ASC+&ScrollAction=Page+2 I have no idea if they fit though. You might contact Sanderson to see if they make the CC5 in 1-3/4". The 1-1/2" and 1-5/8" primary CC5s are available cheaper from Jagsthatrun.com: https://shell7.tdl.com/~jags/Datsun_Order.html I ended up using the 1-5/8" DAT-402C, which I believe is the CC5 1-5/8", coated header set from Sanderson.

LOL!!! I started programming on a Univac 1160, using punch cards . I used a slide rule in middle school, a simple calculator in high school and an HP-15C in college. I guess I'm a bit younger than you, but not by much! Today, you can do so much with simple stuff like Excel on a PC. I use Perl, C, FORTRAN, Matlab too, but for quick stuff, Excel is preferred! Well, the 0.006 to 0.008" off the seat for a useful number for when these timing numbers should be taken for low rpm assessments (DCR calculation, idle quality, low rpm character with respect to overlap, etc.) certainly sounds reasonable to me. Like you point out, there's very little going on from the time the valve starts losing or starts making contact with the seat and the time that flow starts to any appreciable amount after it loses contact during opening or before it makes contact with the seat as it closes. I like that idea and will see how the figures in to the cams I've dealt with as far as realized duration and overlap. Assuming a rigid valvetrain, of course. That could be an issue with higher rpm running, but for low rpm, I think the rigid valvetrain assumption if fairly safe. Vizard told me that his "Overlap Estimator" (See page 62 in his Popular Hotrodding article http://www.compcams.com/Community/Articles/Details.asp?ID=-2026144213) was to be used for timing numbers in light of seat timing. For hydraulic lifters, something close to the advertised duration at 0.004 or 0.006" tappet lift is probably what he would use. Assuming that he is assuming something like the 0.006" to 0.008" off the seat number for tappet lift to measure duration (and therefore overlap), then his guidelines for overlap selection should hold true to numbers that we can find (be nice to have a Cam Doctor!!!) or estimate with math for the various lobes available to us. The math and estimation is really probably only critical for those of us that use solid lifter cams. But that's where my difficulty begins - what duration numbers to use to calculate overlap (of vice versus - what overlap to pic to calculate duration, once you've selected a lobe separation angle) to use the guidelines like he has in that article. David, I'm quite interested to hear how the engine idles and performs with that cam - please keep us updated! Hopefully the spring/retainer swap out Grumpyvette is talking about will get you where you need to be with clearances.

grumpy - you mentioned that DCR should be calculated as to when the valves actually closes. Since Comp gives durations for 3 lift points in the beginning and middle of the curve (.015", .050", .200" tappet lift) for those lobes (4872 and 4873, Int/Exh, respectively), you can fit a curve to the data, take account of the lash at the lifter when the spec'd lash is set at the valve, and come up with an estimate of what the true opening and closing points of the valves will be. I come up with about 273/279 duration at the actual open/close points, using a quadratic curve fit, and lash of 0.010667" and 0.012" respectively at the tappet (assuming a 1.5:1 rocker), an Intake valve closing event at about 63 degrees, and overlap of about 56 degrees. You estimated adding 13 to 15 degrees to the IVC using the .050" duration numbers (which actually is at 41 degrees for the 230 duration, 110 LSA, 4 deg advance), so you're estimate would be 54 to 56 degrees, 7 to 9 degrees less than my estimate shows. I'm not say I'm more correct or you are. After all, at what point near the actual seat timing does the flow really start to matter enough to affect DCR, overlap, etc. Probably something close to that area you or I are estimating. I'd LOVE to know if someone's ever figured out a good way of calculating, spec'ing a cam's Intake Valve Closing point for use with DCR calculators, or for calculating overlap values that should be used for comparison between cams and for gaging the "streetability" of a cam. If anyone is interested, I'll clean up and document my Excel spreadsheet (which shows a trick for calculating the coefficients of polynomials for other than linear curve fits, among other things) and post it. But those cams are a far site milder than the one in my 406 at the moment, and I'd say my cam (probably 10 degrees too large on duration and therefore overlap) is not smooth in the 406 until about 2500 rpm. The cam David has chosen looks plenty mild for street use, IMO.

Thanks, grumpyvette. Yes, I will be checking the lash after letting it warm up and recording all of the lash settings that are present hot. I have a few hundred miles on the engine since I set them hot (about 500 miles after starting the engine). Stupid to wait that long, I know. After I know what the existing hot lash is for each valve, I will pull the intake and investigate the lifters and bores. If the lifter bores are o.k. and the lifters all are intact with no missing material or rollers, the cam will come out of the engine in-situ, and a replacement will go in. I will have the lifters (Isky Red Zone) rebuilt with Crane's bushing upgrade, and then get a new cam in there. If there's lifter bore damage and/or lifter material/needles missing, the engine will come out for a thorough cleaning. It sounds pretty ominous, and it's the reason the car came from Daytona Beach (Sanford) FL to Lorton VA on the autotrain from the recent Z car convention down there in Daytona. I limped it home from the autotrain station in Lorton and parked it until I can work on it. Thanks for the input on the cams. Why Crane doesn't list the LSA always makes me chuckle, but I know I can add the intake and exhaust centerline numbers and divide that answer by 2 to get the lobe separation. Then Crower leaves out what the advertised duration checking height of the lifter is. Ugh. In looking at the cams you suggested, I see they are hydraulic rollers. Any idea how to gage the overlap numbers calculated from the advertised IVO+EVC events (@ 0.004" tappet lift) against advertised IVO+EVC overlap numbers using a solid cam's 0.015" or 0.020" "advertised" event numbers? It seems that what you would really want is the IVO+EVC events just as lash was taken up to do a comparable overlap calculation using 0.004" IVO+EVC events for the hydraulic. Of course, no one gives you the events at lash takeup. Comp Cams at least lists the advertised (either @0.015" or 0.020") duration numbers, 0.050" durations, and 0.200" durations, if you look in their master lobe catalog. I've used Excel to do a 2nd degree polynomial fit to those 3 data pairs to then calculate the duration at lash take-up. The durations are usually 5-10 degrees more than the durations at 0.015" (advertised) or 11-15 degrees larger than the durations listed for 0.020" (advertised). However, I have no idea if this is the correct thing to do, even if the curve fit was excellent that close to the end of the take-up ramp on the lobe. David Vizard told me: "The overlap estimator was for a hydraulic or the actual seat duration of a flat tappet cam," when I asked how to use his "Overlap Estimator" figure on page 62 of his article "Be a Camshaft Expert," from the July 2006 Popular Hotrodding article that pretty much introduces his "get the LSA right, pick an overlap, and calculate the needed duration" method I spoke of earlier. The article is here: http://www.compcams.com/Community/Articles/Details.asp?ID=-2026144213 So to me, that would mean to calculate the overlap for a solid lifter cam, one should use the IVO+EVC events just as lash is taken up or about to open up, respectively, for those events. It would seem that if you use that estimator for a solid cam using 0.015" advertised or 0.020" advertised duration numbers/events, you will be underestimating the actual seat timing overlap, versus a hydraulic cam, but 5-10 or 11-15 degrees, respectively. Does that logic sound correct? I also realize that the low LSA with a smaller duration lobe resulting from using less overlap will mean that I close the intake valve sooner and I can run into too-high Dynamic Compression Ration (DCR) issues. Indeed, this may be one reason to open up the LSA a degree or two, just to keep out of trouble with detonation on pump gas. Either that or retard the 105 LSA cam 4-6 degrees to get the DCR that a 110 LSA cam would give. I've played with Desktop dyno, using the 112 LSA 274/280 low-lash solid roller from Cam Motion that I already have, at 4 to 6 degrees retarded, and the DCR does lower considerably, as well as boosting the high rpm power significantly. But that's just a simulation program that is known to have some issues. Thanks for listening and adding more to this thread - I'm hoping to make it more in depth with this deep discussion of how to calculate overlap (using lash-take-up duration), and what the effects of overlap on street engines with solid or hydraulic cams will be.